|
Dusty and several others have returned. Yes, some people that didn't deserve it got nailed. This is unfortunately what happens when there is a strong association between those that did abuse bugs to cheat and people that partied with them. I may have gone to far in saying that you have no credibility if as you say you specifically didn't act wrongly, but I stand by the idea that what happened under completely different admin and far looser rules means as little with respect to the character of the mud as the fact that it has changed does to you.
Also, by attack I did not suggest Hacking. There where a few one or two wizards that overstepped what they where allowed when still able to log in. There where also 1-2 case of people losing their characters do to sharing (i.e. someone got lucky and guessed their passwords). This is their own fault imho, for using passwords someone could guess, but this was the action of maybe one single person that as you said, didn't have any skills, but got lucky. What I meant was the tirades a few of the more disgruntled people went on and the tendency of a few to bring up how unfairly they where treated at every opertunity. This also was a small number of people.
As for if rules where broken by Faye in this case, like I said, look at the other thread on the same subject. Faye chose to act based on what came from *that* discussion. It may not fit the strict letter of the law, but it doesn't break the spirit of it, which was to prevent certain highly abusive muds from giving special favor to *only* those people that voted. Again, if Faye has acted wrongly, no one that has posted so far has the righ to judge if or to how great a degree this broke the rule or define the punishment for it.
In any case, if you are who I was told, then I never considered you a bad player or knew you to do anything wrong. I wasn't really aware of those that did either, but too many good player where lost that day. Some have gotten permission to return, other have since quit because they literally got ****ed off at the new Admin for being too strict and inconveniencing them, while still others have gotten tired of playing and simply quit. I hate seeing any of these things happen.
As for posting proof. It is true that they never did, but then I doubt they do so in any other places either. Some things also may not have even appeared in logs and only been known through more direct observation. I don't think what was done was handled at all well, but it was done by people that where tired of people ignoring them, tired of listening to people whine about problems and just plain tired. People in such a state can seriously over react.
I didn't like it when it happened, but I hate people using what happened in the past to cast bad light on the way it is now.
Until Synozeer chooses to chime in and say definitively, I stand by what I said about the prior discussion of whether this specific case is a cheat. I do know for certain that when that thread was happening, I and a few others kept Faye up to date on what was being said. If you want to blame someone for breaking a rule, then blame me and the others that read the thread for telling her that enticements that are not player specific where OK.
Hmm, since no one seems to even want to look, the thread was:
Specifically page 5, first post:
This is what Faye is basing the in-game incentive from. The bold and italic part is what allows for what Faye did. If this has in fact changed, then please point out where the new posting is that mentioned the change, so I can inform her. Being one of those the made it a point to inform her of what the change in rules where when they first happened and the limits of what was allowed, fault for any error must fall at least in part on my shoulders for not being aware that the second sentence in that statement was removed from the official rules. Assuming that it is in fact no longer there.
|